The most significant additional investment into general practice at present comes via the PCN DES, and the much of that arrives in the form of the ARRS. We are three years into the five year deal, which means there are only two years left of significant growth of this funding. Further similar increases in future seem unlikely. How can practices make the most of this additional resource?
The scale of the opportunity remains relatively high. Most PCNs have not yet spent their full allowance to date, and some of last year’s expenditure was often used for the vaccination programme rather than being deployed recurrently. This means that many PCNs have getting on for £1M available to invest in new roles over the next two years.
There are three things that practices can do to make more of the opportunity of the ARRS. The first is to think differently about the roles that are needed. To date the process of identifying which roles to employ has often consisted of looking at the list of available roles and choosing the ones that the practices most liked the sound of. But continuing to do this is likely to mean practices will fail to make the most of the opportunity this funding presents.
We know that general practice workload will continue to increase. Demand from the local population will continue to go up, and the advent of ICSs is likely to accelerate the shift of activity from secondary to primary care. At the same time, the number of GPs continues to fall, as despite the push for extra GPs the number leaving continues to exceed those entering the profession.
This means that for general practice to be resilient into the future the model has to change from one where all the activity coming into practices defaults to a GP, to one where the service is led by GPs but delivered by a much wider range of professionals. This is the only way it will be sustainable.
What the ARRS provides is an opportunity to bring in the new roles that are needed and change the way general practice operates. If practices spend some time working out what workforce they want in two years’ time, they can then use the opportunity of the ARRS to create a more fit for purpose workforce and employ the roles that will enable this vision to be realised.
The second is changing the approach to the PCN DES work. At present the approach is generally that practice staff focus on practice work and PCN staff focus on PCN work, and only support practice work if they have any capacity left over. As a result the additional roles feel like an additional burden on practices because of all the training and supervision that is required, and their time is sucked up meeting the increasingly onerous requirements of the PCN DES.
A better way to think about this is in terms of the totality of the workload (across practices and the PCN) and the totality of the workforce, i.e. how do we incorporate the ARRS staff to create a total workforce able to best support both the practice and PCN requirements. By keeping such a strong division between practice and PCN work we are preventing ourselves from making the most of the workforce we do have.
The third is not to underestimate the need to invest in a change or redesign process to go alongside the introduction of the new roles. Incorporating the new roles effectively means changing the way we operate. If we don’t we are simply trying to plug holes in a sinking ship, rather than building ourselves a new boat. But this of course requires additional investment and time, both of which are in short supply.
One way round this however is a creative use of the care coordinator role. So if, for example, we are changing the way practices in a PCN manage prescriptions using pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, then we can use a care coordinator as a change resource to support the change of the prescription process. Once they have done this they can then be a resource to support the change to the way MSK presentations are managed across practices using an ESP (etc etc).
The ARRS is an opportunity for practices to start to build a model that will be resilient into the future. But it won’t happen automatically, and practices need to act now to make the most of it because in two years’ time it may well be too late.
2 Comments
I am not sure we can use a care coordinator ‘as a change resource to support the change of the prescription process’. I think it would fail the test of the guidance point B5.1.b. and fulfills none of B5.2 or B5.3.
That is the problem with ARRS it is too prescriptive.
Thanks Terry. I think pushing the guidance to make it work for practices is part of what needs to be done. I see plenty of places doing this with the roles, especially the care coordinator role.